3 ms·

I wonder if Iran being a dictatorship has a cause? Why does the Arab world hate Israel I wonder? Everything you're talking about is basically a direct result of

I wonder if Iran being a dictatorship has a cause? Why does the Arab world hate Israel I wonder? Everything you're talking about is basically a direct result of UK, US and israeli bullshit in the area. It's people with exactly the same sort of colonial geopolitical ideas as you that CAUSED THE MESS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

spwa4 6mo ago
[flagged]
- thot_experiment 6mo ago
  What are you on about lmao, what is "leftist thought". My ideology? I'm not my ideology, my ideology is an ever shifting set of ideals I explore to try to build an internally consistent model for decision making. How in the world does a belief in US/UK meddling being the proximal cause for many of the modern issues in the region have anything to do with the crimes of the Kremlin. Can you please engage with the substance of my claims in any way? I'm not here to defend whatever "leftism" means to you.
  - spwa4 6mo ago
    > How in the world does a belief in US/UK meddling ... Because you exclude all other meddling as an explanation. The Kremlin is the other big source of meddling (if you rate them by success in actually changing things, US is on top. Moscow is a distant second, and the third is so far behind it's barely worth mentioning, also it's unclear who that even is), so the assumption is you implicitly defend if you attack US meddling. Compare to when 2 people are fighting in the playground and you complain only about ONE of them hitting things, without making any remark about the other, or taking any kind of measure to get the other to stop. People like to describe that as neutrality, but of course, it is anything but. Which then gets confusing because people who are badly informed might start to genuinely believe only one of them was hitting, and might even blame the first for all damages. Of course, this is exactly the point of one-sided reporting, even if the reporting itself is 100% true. Even the BBC is doing it these days, little to no reporting on what happens (imho, not because it's going well) in the UK, and "news in support of UK foreign policy" everywhere else. Oh and separate views for UK people and international viewers. And yes, that's in some ways the same Iran does, but there's no bullets or executions involved if you try to get around it, a pretty big difference. In this conflict the US is defending, let's call it "international liberalism" (in the French revolution sense, ie. laissez-faire), or what the UN calls "freedom of navigation". Which is a euphemism for tax-free international trade over the seas. I get that there are name clashes with for example US politics, let's please not focus the discussion on whether those names are deserving, or who they (don't) match in US politics. And, yes, preventing Iran from getting a nuke falls under liberalism, as in Iran getting a nuke will definitely kill a freedom of navigation in that part of the world. The other side, ie. Russia/China, if we're only counting UN SC members, is about locking down international trade behind political agreements (which is also a euphemism: these agreements were historically never agreements, but rather the outcomes of wars), ie. letting Russia and China, since they have nuclear weapons, decide who gets oil from the middle east and who doesn't. Through threats. So you when you attack one side, getting criticized for supporting the other side, is fair. If you don't know the other side, that's called being badly informed, that's literally just dumb and then really you should shut up.
    - defrost 6mo ago
      > In this conflict the US is defending, let's call it "international liberalism" (in the French revolution sense, ie. laissez-faire), or what the UN calls "freedom of navigation". Utter nonsense - the majority of the world is well aware the Strait was open and free to navigate all the way up to the point the US stepped in. The country directly responsible for the current lack of freedom to navigate is the US.
      - spwa4 6mo ago
        Of course not. https://www.reuters.com/article/world/timeline-irans-recent-clashes-with-the-west-over-gulf-shipping-nuclear-plans-idUSKCN1UG0EU/ https://www.reuters.com/article/world/timeline-irans-recent-... https://www.reuters.com/article/world/britain-says-iran-seizes-two-oil-tankers-in-gulf-iran-says-captured-one-idUSKCN1UE26X/ https://www.reuters.com/article/world/britain-says-iran-seiz... https://www.reuters.com/world/us-navy-says-iran-seized-marshall-islands-flagged-oil-tanker-gulf-oman-2023-04-27/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us-navy-says-iran-seized-marsh... https://www.reuters.com/world/second-oil-tanker-week-seized-by-iran-gulf-us-navy-2023-05-03/ https://www.reuters.com/world/second-oil-tanker-week-seized-... By the way, I'm not going to provide references, but the same goes for the Bab El-Mandeb strait and the "East Coast of Africa" (in other words Iran is trying to tax ALL shipping between Asia/India and Europe, even if it goes around the Cape of Good Hope) > The country directly responsible for the current lack of freedom to navigate is the US. Did you really believe that when you wrote it? I mean you must realize that no matter the motivation or other circumstances, when push comes to shove the person pulling the trigger is responsible ... (and obviously that's Iran)
        Hikikomori 6mo ago
        What might the reason be? Oh it's the first sentence. >Tensions between Iran and the West have escalated since U.S. sanctions on Iranian oil exports took full effect in May and British naval forces seized an Iranian supertanker.
        spwa4 6mo ago
- koonsolo 6mo ago
  So Russia invades Ukraine, and somehow you blame leftists for that? You must be buried deep in Russian propaganda. > when will you sign up for Ukraine's army There is only room in your brain for extreme thoughts? There is a lot of space between not supporting Ukraine and going to the front lines. For example donating money (I sure do as a center-right wing): https://savelife.in.ua/ https://savelife.in.ua/
  - spwa4 6mo ago
    [flagged]
    - koonsolo 6mo ago
      > Of course leftists are responsible for the current state of Russia. I hear there was this thing called "Soviet Union", involved in getting this country to it's current state. I guess you must not now. Look it up? Very strange that you claim the great state of affairs in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania is thanks to the the leftist Social Union. But hey, if you want to make that claim, that's all up to you.
anal_reactor 6mo ago
When in doubt, blame the British. The British theorem: all life's problems can eventually be traced back to the British.
- thot_experiment 6mo ago
  They're almost certainly #1 global problem causers so it's usually the safest bet. Though I wouldn't be as expansive as you, the USA, Portugal, Spain and the USSR are no slouches. Can't be forgetting the Dutch either.
  - anal_reactor 6mo ago
    So basically all powerful countries cause problems for other countries. Not exactly a resolutionary thing. Don't forget China, Japan, Mongolia, Romans, all sorts of infighting between native American groups before Columbus. And I assume that Africa wasn't exactly a paradise even before colonialism.
    - thot_experiment 6mo ago
      Yes, history happened and people should be held to account for it, not ad infinitum, but you know, if my dad killed your dad and took all his shit, and then left it to me, I'm pretty sure I shouldn't get to keep it and all the benefits that come from it just because I had nothing to do with it.
      - anal_reactor 6mo ago
        Dad? Sure. Grandfather? Maybe. Great-grandfather? Let it go.
        AlecSchueler 6mo ago
        And how do you map that onto the timescales of states? Because even on the human scale, my grandparents were around for the British Mandate in Palestine. The British government had to win my own lifetime apologise for atrocities carried out in Northern Ireland.

spwa4 6mo ago

[flagged]

thot_experiment 6mo ago
What are you on about lmao, what is "leftist thought". My ideology? I'm not my ideology, my ideology is an ever shifting set of ideals I explore to try to build an internally consistent model for decision making. How in the world does a belief in US/UK meddling being the proximal cause for many of the modern issues in the region have anything to do with the crimes of the Kremlin. Can you please engage with the substance of my claims in any way? I'm not here to defend whatever "leftism" means to you.
- spwa4 6mo ago
  > How in the world does a belief in US/UK meddling ... Because you exclude all other meddling as an explanation. The Kremlin is the other big source of meddling (if you rate them by success in actually changing things, US is on top. Moscow is a distant second, and the third is so far behind it's barely worth mentioning, also it's unclear who that even is), so the assumption is you implicitly defend if you attack US meddling. Compare to when 2 people are fighting in the playground and you complain only about ONE of them hitting things, without making any remark about the other, or taking any kind of measure to get the other to stop. People like to describe that as neutrality, but of course, it is anything but. Which then gets confusing because people who are badly informed might start to genuinely believe only one of them was hitting, and might even blame the first for all damages. Of course, this is exactly the point of one-sided reporting, even if the reporting itself is 100% true. Even the BBC is doing it these days, little to no reporting on what happens (imho, not because it's going well) in the UK, and "news in support of UK foreign policy" everywhere else. Oh and separate views for UK people and international viewers. And yes, that's in some ways the same Iran does, but there's no bullets or executions involved if you try to get around it, a pretty big difference. In this conflict the US is defending, let's call it "international liberalism" (in the French revolution sense, ie. laissez-faire), or what the UN calls "freedom of navigation". Which is a euphemism for tax-free international trade over the seas. I get that there are name clashes with for example US politics, let's please not focus the discussion on whether those names are deserving, or who they (don't) match in US politics. And, yes, preventing Iran from getting a nuke falls under liberalism, as in Iran getting a nuke will definitely kill a freedom of navigation in that part of the world. The other side, ie. Russia/China, if we're only counting UN SC members, is about locking down international trade behind political agreements (which is also a euphemism: these agreements were historically never agreements, but rather the outcomes of wars), ie. letting Russia and China, since they have nuclear weapons, decide who gets oil from the middle east and who doesn't. Through threats. So you when you attack one side, getting criticized for supporting the other side, is fair. If you don't know the other side, that's called being badly informed, that's literally just dumb and then really you should shut up.
  - defrost 6mo ago
    > In this conflict the US is defending, let's call it "international liberalism" (in the French revolution sense, ie. laissez-faire), or what the UN calls "freedom of navigation". Utter nonsense - the majority of the world is well aware the Strait was open and free to navigate all the way up to the point the US stepped in. The country directly responsible for the current lack of freedom to navigate is the US.
    - spwa4 6mo ago
      Of course not. https://www.reuters.com/article/world/timeline-irans-recent-clashes-with-the-west-over-gulf-shipping-nuclear-plans-idUSKCN1UG0EU/ https://www.reuters.com/article/world/timeline-irans-recent-... https://www.reuters.com/article/world/britain-says-iran-seizes-two-oil-tankers-in-gulf-iran-says-captured-one-idUSKCN1UE26X/ https://www.reuters.com/article/world/britain-says-iran-seiz... https://www.reuters.com/world/us-navy-says-iran-seized-marshall-islands-flagged-oil-tanker-gulf-oman-2023-04-27/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us-navy-says-iran-seized-marsh... https://www.reuters.com/world/second-oil-tanker-week-seized-by-iran-gulf-us-navy-2023-05-03/ https://www.reuters.com/world/second-oil-tanker-week-seized-... By the way, I'm not going to provide references, but the same goes for the Bab El-Mandeb strait and the "East Coast of Africa" (in other words Iran is trying to tax ALL shipping between Asia/India and Europe, even if it goes around the Cape of Good Hope) > The country directly responsible for the current lack of freedom to navigate is the US. Did you really believe that when you wrote it? I mean you must realize that no matter the motivation or other circumstances, when push comes to shove the person pulling the trigger is responsible ... (and obviously that's Iran)
      - Hikikomori 6mo ago
        What might the reason be? Oh it's the first sentence. >Tensions between Iran and the West have escalated since U.S. sanctions on Iranian oil exports took full effect in May and British naval forces seized an Iranian supertanker.
        spwa4 6mo ago
koonsolo 6mo ago
So Russia invades Ukraine, and somehow you blame leftists for that? You must be buried deep in Russian propaganda. > when will you sign up for Ukraine's army There is only room in your brain for extreme thoughts? There is a lot of space between not supporting Ukraine and going to the front lines. For example donating money (I sure do as a center-right wing): https://savelife.in.ua/ https://savelife.in.ua/
- spwa4 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  - koonsolo 6mo ago
    > Of course leftists are responsible for the current state of Russia. I hear there was this thing called "Soviet Union", involved in getting this country to it's current state. I guess you must not now. Look it up? Very strange that you claim the great state of affairs in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania is thanks to the the leftist Social Union. But hey, if you want to make that claim, that's all up to you.

anal_reactor 6mo ago

When in doubt, blame the British. The British theorem: all life's problems can eventually be traced back to the British.

thot_experiment 6mo ago
They're almost certainly #1 global problem causers so it's usually the safest bet. Though I wouldn't be as expansive as you, the USA, Portugal, Spain and the USSR are no slouches. Can't be forgetting the Dutch either.
- anal_reactor 6mo ago
  So basically all powerful countries cause problems for other countries. Not exactly a resolutionary thing. Don't forget China, Japan, Mongolia, Romans, all sorts of infighting between native American groups before Columbus. And I assume that Africa wasn't exactly a paradise even before colonialism.
  - thot_experiment 6mo ago
    Yes, history happened and people should be held to account for it, not ad infinitum, but you know, if my dad killed your dad and took all his shit, and then left it to me, I'm pretty sure I shouldn't get to keep it and all the benefits that come from it just because I had nothing to do with it.
    - anal_reactor 6mo ago
      Dad? Sure. Grandfather? Maybe. Great-grandfather? Let it go.
      - AlecSchueler 6mo ago
        And how do you map that onto the timescales of states? Because even on the human scale, my grandparents were around for the British Mandate in Palestine. The British government had to win my own lifetime apologise for atrocities carried out in Northern Ireland.